[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

RE: Tyrannosauroid material from Uzbekistan



I attended Miyashita's talk at SVP, and he mentioned that he is now less sure 
of it being a tyrannosauroid than when he wrote the abstract, due to the new 
material.  
----------------------------------------
> Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2011 23:37:22 -0800
> From: mickey_mortimer111@msn.com
> To: dinosaur@usc.edu
> Subject: RE: Tyrannosauroid material from Uzbekistan
>
>
> And yet Miyashita (2011) found "A redescription of Itemirus medullaris from 
> the Turonian of Uzbekistan supports the hypothesis that this taxon represents 
> a relatively derived non-tyrannosaurid tyrannosauroid."  Will be interesting 
> to see his analysis, in addition to Sues and Averianov's.  Note Longrich and 
> Currie's analysis only included paravians, so could not recover a 
> tyrannosauroid position.  No doubt the correct answer is that Russell and 
> Dong (1994) were right and dromaeosaurids and tyrannosaurids are sister taxa. 
> ;)
>
> Miyashita, 2011. Cranial morphology of the basal tyrannosauroid Itemirus 
> medullaris and evolution of the braincase pneumaticity in non-avian 
> coelurosaurs. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. SVP 2011 Abstracts. 159.
>
> Mickey Mortimer
>
> ----------------------------------------
> > Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 15:11:58 +1100
> > From: tijawi@gmail.com
> > To: dinosaur@usc.edu
> > Subject: Re: Tyrannosauroid material from Uzbekistan
> >
> > bh480@scn.org <bh480@scn.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Alexander Averianov & Hans-Dieter Sues (2011)
> > > Skeletal remains of Tyrannosauroidea (Dinosauria: Theropoda) from the
> > > Bissekty Formation (Upper Cretaceous: Turonian) of Uzbekistan.
> > > Cretaceous Research (advance online publication)
> > > doi:10.1016/j.cretres.2011.11.009
> > > http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019566711100187X
> >
> >
> > The paper also features this tantalizing snippet regarding _Itemirus
> > medullaris_, from the Bissekty Formation:
> >
> >
> > "_Itemirus_ has sometimes been classified as a tyrannosauroid
> > (e.g., Holtz, 2004), but newly collected material indicates that
> > it is, in fact, referable to Dromaeosauridae (Sues and Averianov,
> > in preparation)."
> >
> >
> > It should be noted that _Itemirus_ was found to be a dromaeosaurid (a
> > velociraptorine, no less) in the phylogenetic analysis of Longrich and
> > Currie (2009), in their description of _Hesperonychus_. But the
> > prospect of new _Itemirus_ material is exciting.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Tim
>